One-*** efficacy questions

[RobinBHM]

NO! The cause is the response to the Covid pandemic.

Herd immunity strategy would have overloaded the hospitals.

You believe it was a choice between lockdown and economy or perhaps NHS treating Covid versus NHS treating other healthcare issues.

I may agree in some local instances that might have been true, but on a countrywide scale....no.

You've suggested 30% of Covid deaths might be related to catching Covid in hospital - well had hospitals not reconfigured for Covid and non Covid sections and leaving more non Covid capacity.....that % would've been higher

In fact had a very hard and fast total lockdown have been put in place with a prevent strategy....hospitals wouldn't have had to be converted to Covid treatment centres.

 

[RobinBHM]

I don't think anyone advocated doing nothing.

No they advocated protecting the vulnerable....but Rorschach and any other pro herd immunity / GBD believer has yet to say how this could be done (it can't)

 

[Rorschach]

That doesn't answer my question. One of my daughter's best friends is a scrub nurse at Bournemouth General. She has been seconded to the covid wards for most of the last 12 months. I know for a fact that they were close to being overwhelmed. She loved her job but she hates getting up in the morning right now. At one point they were sending patients to the Nightingale hospital in Exeter. I'll ask again: how would not implementing lockdown, and allowing hospitals to become overwhelmed, have improved waiting times for non-covid conditions?

I'm sorry about your relative. My wife died of cancer so you don't have a monopoly there.

Because the hospital was closed purely on the precautionary principle. It wasn't closed during the most recent lockdown when hospitals were actually full of covid patients (ours still wasn't).

 

[Rorschach]

Herd immunity strategy would have overloaded the hospitals.

You don't know that because we never tried it. Stop parroting your BBC nonsense please.

 

[selectortone]

Because the hospital was closed purely on the precautionary principle. It wasn't closed during the most recent lockdown when hospitals were actually full of covid patients (ours still wasn't).

We'll, you're very lucky that your particular hospital wasn't full of covid patients. You still haven't answered my question.

 

[Rorschach]

No they advocated protecting the vulnerable....but Rorschach and any other pro herd immunity / GBD believer has yet to say how this could be done (it can't)

Exactly the same way we already protected the vulnerable, we locked them up, the difference being I wouldn't have locked up millions of healthy people as well.

 

[Rorschach]

We'll, You're very lucky that your particular hospital wasn't full of covid patients. You still Haven't answered my question.

Yes I have.

 

[RobinBHM]

how would not implementing lockdown, and allowing hospitals to become overwhelmed, have improved waiting times for non-covid conditions

If I understand correctly I believe it comes from the simplistic argument of false choice....i.e. It must be a choice between protecting the elderly or the economy.

Or it must be a choice between protecting the elderly or destroying the lives of young people.

 

[Selwyn]

No they advocated protecting the vulnerable....but Rorschach and any other pro herd immunity / GBD believer has yet to say how this could be done (it can't)

To be honest it wouldn't make much difference. The "vulnerable" as you call it were still going to Tesco like everyone else throughout. Viral particles are absolutely everywhere, its rather sweet that you think they can be controlled.

If furlough wasn't so convenient a lot more people would have gone back to work but it remains a fig leaf for lockdown. Loads of companies worked anyway throughout lockdown - all the trades carried on. Very few people use their mask properly which don't work anyway - the whole thing is a pantomime now. But to be fair the vaccine did 95% of the job in the first 3 to 4 weeks of it being injected into everyone

 

[Trainee neophyte]

If you have alternative data I would be very interested if you could share it.

There are always alternative facts. It's a known fact, in fact.

These are fun: Arundhati Roy peddles blatant lies in her propaganda article in The Guardian
https://www.opindia.com/2021/04/nyp...covid-19-india-retracts-funeral-pyre-details/
The problem with India is the colossal number of people. Everyone is excited by the numbers, but no one is putting it in context. India currently has the same number of deaths per 100,000 as Greece. We are coming out of lockdown and getting ready for tourists - no dead littering the streets and overflowing hospitals here, but the number of deaths as a percentage of population is the same. How does that work?

 

[selectortone]

Yes I have.

You haven't. I gave you a pretty typical first hand experience from the covid front-line. How would not implementing lockdown, and allowing the NHS to become overwhelmed, have improved waiting times for non-covid conditions?

 

[Selwyn]

Herd immunity strategy would have overloaded the hospitals.

You believe it was a choice between lockdown and economy or perhaps NHS treating Covid versus NHS treating other healthcare issues.

I may agree in some local instances that might have been true, but on a countrywide scale....no.

You've suggested 30% of Covid deaths might be related to catching Covid in hospital - well had hospitals not reconfigured for Covid and non Covid sections and leaving more non Covid capacity.....that % would've been higher

In fact had a very hard and fast total lockdown have been put in place with a prevent strategy....hospitals wouldn't have had to be converted to Covid treatment centres.

You are making a lot of assumptions there.

People change their behaviour based on percieved and actual risk. They don't need a govt edict to do it.

 

[Selwyn]

You haven't. I gave you a pretty typical first hand experience from the covid front-line. How would not implementing lockdown, and allowing the NHS to become overwhelmed, have improved waiting times for non-covid conditions?

Well how about for a start, hospitals that did not have loads of covid patients and never got lots of covid patients stay open for business last year? They didn't.

 

[RobinBHM]

Exactly the same way we already protected the vulnerable, we locked them up, the difference being I wouldn't have locked up millions of healthy people as well.

You haven't provided any detail.

How would you identify every vulnerable person?
how would you be able to shield them?

There are millions of vulnerable people, I'd be interested to know how much you think the cost of shielding them would've cost over a year.


If you really believe that was the solution, you can't keep glossing over the detail, bland, dismissive claims don't cut it.

 

[RobinBHM]

You are making a lot of assumptions there.

People change their behaviour based on percieved and actual risk. They don't need a govt edict to do it.

People did change their behaviour, the vulnerable did indeed shield as much as they could.
And still we had hospitals full.

So herd immunity would been much much worse

 

[RobinBHM]

Well how about for a start, hospitals that did not have loads of covid patients and never got lots of covid patients stay open for business last year? They didn't.

Do you mean there were thousands of NHS clinical staff with no work to do?

 

[selectortone]

Well how about for a start, hospitals that did not have loads of covid patients and never got lots of covid patients stay open for business last year? They didn't.

Well, I'm glad you had covid-free hospitals. That certainly wasn't the case anywhere around here.

 

[Rorschach]

I'd be interested to know how much you think the cost of shielding them would've cost over a year.

A lot less than lockdown cost. Lockdown cost the economy 251 billion £'s so far. Assuming 10 million vulnerable people that's £25k each to help shield them.

 

[Rorschach]

Well, I'm glad you had covid-free hospitals. That certainly wasn't the case anywhere around here.

It was the case here, so my relative could have been treated.

 

[selectortone]

It was the case here, so my relative could have been treated.

So you keep saying. It doesn't answer my question.